MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1972033085 · doi:10.1080/03086534.2012.697614

Anglo-Italian Armament Trade Competition in Iraq: The Italian Air Force Mission to Iraq, 1937–40

2012· article· en· W1972033085 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Massimiliano Fiore

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Imperial & Commonwealth History · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicItalian Fascism and Post-war Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompetition (biology)International tradePolitical scienceEconomic historyHistoryAncient historyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article seeks to shed light on a largely neglected episode in the history of Anglo-Italian imperial competition in the Middle East. Although reference has often been made to the military and commercial aspects of the Italian Air Force Mission to Iraq, very little research has been conducted to uncover the political and strategic consequences of this in the context of Anglo-Italian imperial competition. The Air Force Mission to Iraq was an important aspect of the imperial policy pursued by the Fascist regime, the ultimate goal of which was to supplant British influence in the region. Yet, although the Italian government succeeded in exploiting Arab resentment towards British policies and asserted the position of its own aeronautical industry in a market tightly controlled by Britain, the ambitious programme ultimately failed because Iraq was not prepared to enter into direct conflict with His Majesty's Government. The final upshot is a delineation not only of the long-term clash of interests that separated Britain and Italy in the Middle East, but also the strengths and limits of Fascist Italy's imperial policies in the region.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.157
Threshold uncertainty score0.312

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.006
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.267 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Imperial & Commonwealth HistorySame topicItalian Fascism and Post-war SocietyFrench-language works237,207